New Orleans' first inspector general, Robert Cerasoli, was known for his swagger. The tough-talking Bostonian came to town in 2007, set up the office, earned some headlines, stirred some controversy, even did a little theater (well sort of -- he staged Q-and-A sessions following performances of Nikolai Gogol's comedy, "The Inspector General.") Then, before he managed to actually get a whole lot of investigating done, he quit for health reasons and headed back north.

Times-Picayune archiveInspector General Edouard Quatrevaux

At first the man who now holds the job, Ed Quatrevaux, seemed a lower key, more buttoned-down sort. He's also run a more focused operation, one that regularly churns out reports that are as data-driven and detailed as they are dramatic. Quatrevaux was the one, for example, who exposed the presence of 18 relatives on the Municipal Court payroll during Judge Paul Sens' reign as chief judge, and who asked the Judiciary Commission to investigate.

But that doesn't mean he's shy and retiring, either. Quatrevaux appears frequently at the side of U.S. Attorney Jim Letten, who calls him an essential partner in the fight against corruption. Nor does he stick to legal nuts and bolts. Quatrevaux also speaks out about appearances of impropriety, like when he raised questions over the time Sens and his political ally, Sheriff Marlin Gusman, hired one another's wives.

In his latest move, Quatrevaux went even further than that. He focused not so much on the presence, not even the appearance, but the mere possibility of widespread wrongdoing.

In a brief, strange, and remarkably in-your-face letter to Mayor Mitch Landrieu, Quatrevaux excoriated the Sewerage & Water Board, a city/state agency over which Landrieu presides as president. His charge was not so much that the agency is corrupt, although he did raise significant questions over individual practices. His main argument, rather, was that it's corruptible.

Based on an undisclosed "risk assessment" formula that takes into consideration "audit 'red flags' " and "standard indicators of potential fraud," Quatrevaux wrote that the water board's score is "second only to an entity where a criminal investigation was in progress at the time of the assessment."

Factors, he continued, included the 2010 corruption conviction of former board member, operations committee chair and minister Ben Edwards, who solicited contributions for his church from a contractor, steered work to his benefactor and pocketed the cash. To show that board involvement in procurement is still an issue, Quatrevaux recounted a single current anecdote about an insurance contract that the finance committee delayed awarding as it debated whether the required disadvantaged business enterprise participation was enough.

"By all appearances, the Finance Committee merely used the DBE issue as cover for retaining the current contractor without competition," he wrote. "In doing so, the Finance Committee eliminated fair and open competition in favor of cronyism, to the likely detriment of the citizens of New Orleans."

Quatrevaux also considered news reports of a stunningly generous but apparently legal retirement package for Executive Director Marcia St. Martin, the prevalence of take-home cars (which the board says are necessary given the job's demands), and the out-of-proportion cost of employee health insurance (which the board disputes).

His purpose, he said, was to speak out preemptively, before the board and City Council consider a substantial rate hike to fix the notoriously broken system.

"The need for infrastructure improvements is obvious and not at issue," he wrote. "The issue is whether the S&WB has the capacity to manage additional resources."

Then came the big finish to this assertion of a problem: An offer to be the solution, to monitor the board at an estimated cost of three-fourths of a percent of its revenue budget, or about $1.4 million, Quatrevaux estimated.

Landrieu's response was, let's just say, measured. His spokesman said the letter warrants a "hard look."

Probably not too hard. Landrieu asked the board to delay its rate vote until September and to try to mitigate the cost to consumers in the meantime. But the fact is that the mayor is going to have to push a big increase sooner or later, and Quatrevaux's claims could well fuel opposition or give council members cold feet. Then there's the obvious difficulty of finding money to pay for the monitoring in the first place.

Quatrevaux, of course, always says that watchdogging pays for itself in cost savings from the discovery of waste, fraud and abuse, and that may be true with the water board.

As sensational as his request was, I'm guessing we're not about to find out.